Share this story
Close X
Switch to Desktop Site

Leaked 'black budget': Mixed views on damage to US intel operations

Some analysts, as well as the US government, say Edward Snowden's new leak, of the 'black budget' for US clandestine operations, reveals too much about US intelligence priorities. Others, who argue for more transparency, practically cheer.

The National Security Administration (NSA) campus in Fort Meade, Md., June 6, 2013.

Patrick Semansky/AP/File

About these ads

The "black budget" for US clandestine operations – newly leaked by former US contractor Edward Snowden – portrays a sprawling global operation that is geared to detect and defeat terrorists, but is dominated by a data-collection program so massive that other priorities could easily be crowded out, analysts and critics said one day after the top-secret document was published.

Details from the 2013 National Intelligence Program budget, portions of which the Washington Post made available as of Thursday on its website, identify top US spending priorities as fighting terrorism, halting the spread of nuclear weapons, warning of critical events overseas, counterintelligence, and cyberespionage and cyberattack operations.

Some information in the 178-page summary document simply validates what was already thought to be true – such as the level of spending for the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and National Security Agency (NSA). But the amount of detail, together with a big-picture overview of intelligence operations, provides a much fuller picture of a government activity that has expanded dramatically over the past decade.

Some experts immediately denounced the leak as irresponsible and damaging to US national security. Others said much of the data that were released should have been public all along, and they questioned the integrity of the US classification system and suggested that the leaked information shows that US intelligence services need more accountability to the public.

“We want to be a more open society, and this leak shows that the general level of secrecy is set too high,” says James Lewis, a senior fellow and the director of the Technology and Public Policy Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “We have to rethink how we get more information on these programs before the public for them to think about and debate, so that we have better policy decisions.”


Page 1 of 4

Follow Stories Like This
Get the Monitor stories you care about delivered to your inbox.